On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 13:41 +1100, Stewart Heitmann wrote:
> Thus I suggest it would ultimately be better if the sync engine only sent
> those
> particular vcard fields to a plugin that it knows the plugin can handle.
> However this requires each plugin to register the fields they handle with the
> > I find that if one plugin ignores a cvard entry because it does not
> > recognise it, then the multisync engine thinks the plugin device has device
> > deleted that entry and promptly deletes the same entry from the other
> > plugin
> > device.
> > Is this a known bug?
>
> not that i know of
mån 2005-01-03 klockan 17:52 +0100 skrev Armin Bauer:
> On Mon, 2005-01-03 at 17:25, Christian Hilgers wrote:
> > Christian Hilgers wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I am new to this list and hope I add all relevant data.
> > > I was able to sync in both directions,
> > > mobile -> evolution
> > > evol
On Mon, 2005-01-03 at 17:25, Christian Hilgers wrote:
> Christian Hilgers wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am new to this list and hope I add all relevant data.
> > I was able to sync in both directions,
> > mobile -> evolution
> > evolution -> mobile
>
> I trying again with a fresh installed system:
>
Christian Hilgers wrote:
Hi,
I am new to this list and hope I add all relevant data.
I was able to sync in both directions,
mobile -> evolution
evolution -> mobile
I trying again with a fresh installed system:
source taken from cvs (branch_80x)
configured, make && make install done on t
the followi
